Said it before and will say it again: JJ Abrams HATES that space is big. He is literally incapable of writing for an environment where the characters can't lookup and see everything that's happening anywhere else in the entire cosmos. Not even on a monitor - they have to be able to see galactic events unfolding in real time with their own eyes peering skyward.
That was my biggest problem with the Force Awakens.
The Starkiller Base destroys a bunch of planets that is assumed to be within separate solar systems. All these explosions are visible from the Rebel base and happen in seconds after each other. The weapon would have to travel faster than light and might produce a tiny flash of light produced by tachyons, but it would not be visible from a planet lightyears away since the explosion would have to be about the size of a solar system or bigger to be noticeable. The other possibility is that all the planets are in the same solar system, but that is just as unlikely without massive planetary engineering that is beyond the capabilities of the current Star Wars galaxy.
Is she the one that, to borrow from SFDebris, "put Janeway out of my misery"?
Nope, she is the one that brought Janeway back. I will say though that her take on the Voyager books was pretty good overall, and were much more interesting than anything that was going on in the TNG or DS9 books. The addition of the Full Circle Fleet was a good way the spice up the Voyager plot concept, as opposed to the endless evil-Federation conspiracies that have clogged up most of the other post-Nemesis books.
That was my biggest problem with the Force Awakens.
The Starkiller Base destroys a bunch of planets that is assumed to be within separate solar systems. All these explosions are visible from the Rebel base and happen in seconds after each other. The weapon would have to travel faster than light and might produce a tiny flash of light produced by tachyons, but it would not be visible from a planet lightyears away since the explosion would have to be about the size of a solar system or bigger to be noticeable. The other possibility is that all the planets are in the same solar system, but that is just as unlikely without massive planetary engineering that is beyond the capabilities of the current Star Wars galaxy.
Although I don't think it is explicitly stated in the movie, the Star Wars official websites description of the First Order's base seems to imply the planets were all in the Hosnian system. Which actually makes the sense of scale even worse when Han and the others can look up at the sky in a system a quarter of the galaxy away and can make out the individual planets of another system.
I do believe that is also an item on the big wish list, ie "Hire an actual science fiction writer", I mean she's no Peter David (would be my dream pick), or Judith and Garfield Reeve-Stevens, but she is a sci-fi novelist.
Add Diane Duane, David Drake, and Timothy Zahn to this and you've got my dream team.
Has Zahn written Trek books? All I know him for is the Thrawn trilogy. That said, those are all good authors.
No, he hasn't, but neither has Drake, although there's a surprisingly large number of stylistic similarities between Jim Kirk and Drake's character Daniel Leary.
I've read several of Zahn's non-franchise works, including Night Train to Rigel (space travel by interstellar railroad) and the Cobra novels ("What do you do with super soldiers after the war is over?"). They're all on a par with the Thrawn books for quality.
Eh, I like the Aaron Allston X-Wing novels better.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Said it before and will say it again: JJ Abrams HATES that space is big. He is literally incapable of writing for an environment where the characters can't lookup and see everything that's happening anywhere else in the entire cosmos. Not even on a monitor - they have to be able to see galactic events unfolding in real time with their own eyes peering skyward.
Indeed. "What? It's new and different? KILL IT WITH FIRE."
Zahn would be a HUGE boon, as the Star Wars fans are wanting him in the new universe somehow...
It's not "It's new and different" that's the problem, this is only a line used to create a strawman. The problem is that Star Trek is big at this point with a lot of material that set "rules" for stuff to come. When this "new and different" addition simply ignores that and just does things because "others did it as well" it's neither "courageous" nor deserves "praise".
If they had introduced guns in Lord of the Rings or starships in Harry Potter or car races in Star War... uh, never mind the last. But if people did that you can't mock "purists" for having a problem with it.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Guns in Lord of the Rings? Not quite but you can have black powder weapons in D&D, which was a much more blatant LOTR rip off when originally created.
You're reinforcing my point here
Just because another franchise does something doesn't mean you have or should change ways that drastically in another one, no matter if similiar or not.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
But I think Zahn is not quite ideal for Star Trek for another reason - he writes a lot of military science fiction, he loves strategy and tactics. It might be too "martial" for Star Trek.
But if they want a war story, and show off Starfleet Officers as competent, well trained experts of their fields, you definitely can't go wrong with him.
Not that he's actually an option on the table.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Said it before and will say it again: JJ Abrams HATES that space is big. He is literally incapable of writing for an environment where the characters can't lookup and see everything that's happening anywhere else in the entire cosmos. Not even on a monitor - they have to be able to see galactic events unfolding in real time with their own eyes peering skyward.
That was my biggest problem with the Force Awakens.
The Starkiller Base destroys a bunch of planets that is assumed to be within separate solar systems. All these explosions are visible from the Rebel base and happen in seconds after each other. The weapon would have to travel faster than light and might produce a tiny flash of light produced by tachyons, but it would not be visible from a planet lightyears away since the explosion would have to be about the size of a solar system or bigger to be noticeable. The other possibility is that all the planets are in the same solar system, but that is just as unlikely without massive planetary engineering that is beyond the capabilities of the current Star Wars galaxy.
As the page jonsills linked noted, this is not a new problem, and it's something Star Trek has had problems with, too. In TNG: "Redemption" we're expected to believe that 23 starships can provide sufficient coverage on the entirety of the minimum several-light-year-long Klingon-Romulan border to keep any Romulan ships from supporting Duras. And in Star Trek VI Sulu says they're heading home on impulse power from roughly 1,000 LY away. Impulse is the ship's sublight engine; do the math.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Said it before and will say it again: JJ Abrams HATES that space is big. He is literally incapable of writing for an environment where the characters can't lookup and see everything that's happening anywhere else in the entire cosmos. Not even on a monitor - they have to be able to see galactic events unfolding in real time with their own eyes peering skyward.
That was my biggest problem with the Force Awakens.
The Starkiller Base destroys a bunch of planets that is assumed to be within separate solar systems. All these explosions are visible from the Rebel base and happen in seconds after each other. The weapon would have to travel faster than light and might produce a tiny flash of light produced by tachyons, but it would not be visible from a planet lightyears away since the explosion would have to be about the size of a solar system or bigger to be noticeable. The other possibility is that all the planets are in the same solar system, but that is just as unlikely without massive planetary engineering that is beyond the capabilities of the current Star Wars galaxy.
As the page jonsills linked noted, this is not a new problem, and it's something Star Trek has had problems with, too. In TNG: "Redemption" we're expected to believe that 23 starships can provide sufficient coverage on the entirety of the minimum several-light-year-long Klingon-Romulan border to keep any Romulan ships from supporting Duras. And in Star Trek VI Sulu says they're heading home on impulse power from roughly 1,000 LY away. Impulse is the ship's sublight engine; do the math.
I assumed Sulu meant that they were using "Full Impulse Power" at that moment.
And that they were also doing WARP Jumps in between "Cataloging Gaseous Planetary Anomalies" along their route back home through the Beta Quadrant.
Also remember that in The Motion Picture, it was indicated that Half Impulse was about half the speed of light. (.5c)
So Full Impulse is probably pretty darn fast. (though not as fast as the actual Speed of Light)
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Said it before and will say it again: JJ Abrams HATES that space is big. He is literally incapable of writing for an environment where the characters can't lookup and see everything that's happening anywhere else in the entire cosmos. Not even on a monitor - they have to be able to see galactic events unfolding in real time with their own eyes peering skyward.
That was my biggest problem with the Force Awakens.
The Starkiller Base destroys a bunch of planets that is assumed to be within separate solar systems. All these explosions are visible from the Rebel base and happen in seconds after each other. The weapon would have to travel faster than light and might produce a tiny flash of light produced by tachyons, but it would not be visible from a planet lightyears away since the explosion would have to be about the size of a solar system or bigger to be noticeable. The other possibility is that all the planets are in the same solar system, but that is just as unlikely without massive planetary engineering that is beyond the capabilities of the current Star Wars galaxy.
As the page jonsills linked noted, this is not a new problem, and it's something Star Trek has had problems with, too. In TNG: "Redemption" we're expected to believe that 23 starships can provide sufficient coverage on the entirety of the minimum several-light-year-long Klingon-Romulan border to keep any Romulan ships from supporting Duras. And in Star Trek VI Sulu says they're heading home on impulse power from roughly 1,000 LY away. Impulse is the ship's sublight engine; do the math.
I assumed Sulu meant that they were using "Full Impulse Power" at that moment.
And that they were also doing WARP Jumps in between "Cataloging Gaseous Planetary Anomalies" along their route back home through the Beta Quadrant.
Also remember that in The Motion Picture, it was indicated that Half Impulse was about half the speed of light. (.5c)
So Full Impulse is probably pretty darn fast. (though not as fast as the actual Speed of Light)
So, they're headed home, some 1000 lightyears away, at full impulse, which is apparently a significant fraction of c. So they should be there in only, say, 1200 years. Of course, given Lorentz transformations, that might seem like only a few decades ship-time...
Indeed. "What? It's new and different? KILL IT WITH FIRE."
Zahn would be a HUGE boon, as the Star Wars fans are wanting him in the new universe somehow...
It's not "It's new and different" that's the problem, this is only a line used to create a strawman. The problem is that Star Trek is big at this point with a lot of material that set "rules" for stuff to come. When this "new and different" addition simply ignores that and just does things because "others did it as well" it's neither "courageous" nor deserves "praise".
If they had introduced guns in Lord of the Rings or starships in Harry Potter or car races in Star War... uh, never mind the last. But if people did that you can't mock "purists" for having a problem with it.
Meh. It's all a matter of perspective.
Let's not make veiled arguments... most Trek fans today view the franchise through TNG-flavored lenses. This is not surprising, as most of the fan base today grew up on that era, if not that show in particular. That's not to say that ALL fans grew up, or prefer, that branch of the franchise... nor does that mean it negates what came before it (or after it). Still, that view dominates the franchise.
This is why the Abrams movies upset so many fans, by my observations.
They are not continuations of the same, they are variations on a theme. And, I'm not just talking plot points here... structurally, thematically, stylistically... the Abrams movies *are* a variation on The Original Series. It's the same riff, but in a minor key... or, a slightly altered riff in the same key... but, it's a variation, not a continuation. And, sure, that may not be everyone's cup of tea, but it doesn't make it "out of bounds."
And, no, motorcycles don't ruin Trek... which is what I assume you're trying to get at.
Let's not make veiled arguments... most Trek fans today view the franchise through TNG-flavored lenses. This is not surprising, as most of the fan base today grew up on that era, if not that show in particular. That's not to say that ALL fans grew up, or prefer, that branch of the franchise... nor does that mean it negates what came before it (or after it). Still, that view dominates the franchise.
I'd disagree here, although I have of course no way of talking about or for "most Trek fans". In my subjective observation largely based on these forums and reddit which is my main exposure to other Star Trek fans other than the select people who are close to me personally I'd say "most Trek fans" are rather condescending about TNG and mostly are in favour of DS9's later seasons as the show became more action oriented and more streamlined OR they're mostly TOS influenced. A lot of people grew up on TNG though, that might be true simply due to the mean age distribution we have.
This is why the Abrams movies upset so many fans, by my observations.
They are not continuations of the same, they are variations on a theme. And, I'm not just talking plot points here... structurally, thematically, stylistically... the Abrams movies *are* a variation on The Original Series. It's the same riff, but in a minor key... or, a slightly altered riff in the same key... but, it's a variation, not a continuation. And, sure, that may not be everyone's cup of tea, but it doesn't make it "out of bounds."
I can only speak for myself here without diving into too many speculations. But yes, to me it's being a variation is the biggest problem. Despite being so different it slashed the creativity of the people involved. Reimagining classic icons is never well received and the fact that the modern films even downright retold stories we already had didn't help either. If we had followed the Kelvin for example the movies could have been singificantly better in my personal opinion, putting aside my dislike of the aesthetic choices they made as well as the juvenile comic relief. But fear not, a continuation wouldn't have been the better choice - basically all the TNG movies that "continued" the show's characters were mediocre or downright terrible. Show to movie transitions don't work and the only way the TMP movies with the original crew worked were because they largely were a series of movies, trying to combine the best of both worlds. But we essentially need a show crew and a movie crew in my opinion.
But I'm at least not opposed to new and original ideas. My favourite parts of STO for example are the early story arcs that didn't rely on rehashing show plots and the Deferi being a completely original creation are more dear to me than any brief cameo we have in the entire game. In general, Trek games weaving their own consistent stories were always superior to those trying to rehash already known events.
And, no, motorcycles don't ruin Trek... which is what I assume you're trying to get at.
No, I was referring to pod-racers in Star Wars. I even said "Star Wars" (okay, I missed the "s", it says Star War, but meh)
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Let's not make veiled arguments... most Trek fans today view the franchise through TNG-flavored lenses. This is not surprising, as most of the fan base today grew up on that era, if not that show in particular. That's not to say that ALL fans grew up, or prefer, that branch of the franchise... nor does that mean it negates what came before it (or after it). Still, that view dominates the franchise.
I'd disagree here, although I have of course no way of talking about or for "most Trek fans". In my subjective observation largely based on these forums and reddit which is my main exposure to other Star Trek fans other than the select people who are close to me personally I'd say "most Trek fans" are rather condescending about TNG and mostly are in favour of DS9's later seasons as the show became more action oriented and more streamlined OR they're mostly TOS influenced. A lot of people grew up on TNG though, that might be true simply due to the mean age distribution we have.
This is why the Abrams movies upset so many fans, by my observations.
They are not continuations of the same, they are variations on a theme. And, I'm not just talking plot points here... structurally, thematically, stylistically... the Abrams movies *are* a variation on The Original Series. It's the same riff, but in a minor key... or, a slightly altered riff in the same key... but, it's a variation, not a continuation. And, sure, that may not be everyone's cup of tea, but it doesn't make it "out of bounds."
I can only speak for myself here without diving into too many speculations. But yes, to me it's being a variation is the biggest problem. Despite being so different it slashed the creativity of the people involved. Reimagining classic icons is never well received and the fact that the modern films even downright retold stories we already had didn't help either. If we had followed the Kelvin for example the movies could have been singificantly better in my personal opinion, putting aside my dislike of the aesthetic choices they made as well as the juvenile comic relief. But fear not, a continuation wouldn't have been the better choice - basically all the TNG movies that "continued" the show's characters were mediocre or downright terrible. Show to movie transitions don't work and the only way the TMP movies with the original crew worked were because they largely were a series of movies, trying to combine the best of both worlds. But we essentially need a show crew and a movie crew in my opinion.
But I'm at least not opposed to new and original ideas. My favourite parts of STO for example are the early story arcs that didn't rely on rehashing show plots and the Deferi being a completely original creation are more dear to me than any brief cameo we have in the entire game. In general, Trek games weaving their own consistent stories were always superior to those trying to rehash already known events.
And, no, motorcycles don't ruin Trek... which is what I assume you're trying to get at.
No, I was referring to pod-racers in Star Wars. I even said "Star Wars" (okay, I missed the "s", it says Star War, but meh)
Fair enough, and my mistake about the motorcycles, LOL.
Your comments and observations are well-thought, so allow me to refine my own:
I would agree that, by and large, fans seem to gravitate towards DS9 as their "favo(u)rite" today, due to the action (but, also, the superior storytelling)... I would still argue, though, that TNG is still "the measuring stick" for the majority of the fan base. DS9 and VOY are continuations that rest on the universe-expanding done in TNG. It may not be everyone's favorite, but it is the foundation that "modern" Trek is built upon. From ship design, to uniforms, to species, TNG fuels at least one understanding of what makes Trek "Trek."
Of course, variation vs. continuation is what pushed Abrams to do what he did... he preferred the TOS series, but didn't what to disrupt that branch of canon. He thus moved the toys into another sandbox, for better or worse.
I'm curious, now... how would you feel about the new series jumping ahead in the Abrams universe? Would that give you enough differentiation, in terms of the "movie crew" and "show crew" idea?
I'm curious, now... how would you feel about the new series jumping ahead in the Abrams universe? Would that give you enough differentiation, in terms of the "movie crew" and "show crew" idea?
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if CBS decided to do a reboot version of TNG. As you pointed out, TNG for better or worse is regarded as the benchmark for Star Trek's success on television. I could easily see CBS's executives deciding to try to copy that formula again in a modernized rebooted format.
Would it be as successful as the original TNG? Probably not. Rebooting something like that only works if you understand why audiences liked and disliked the various aspects of the show. I've seen nothing in recent years to indicate that CBS has any real understanding of why the franchise was successful, rather most of the time they seem almost embarrassed to be associated with it.
There is also the issue of societal timing. TOS and TNG were products of older generations. Societal standards and views on various issues were different back then. In todays age many of cultural norms have changed and that is part of why modern writers have such trouble retelling the older stories. Modern writers don't always understand the reasoning behind the older generations views, so they instead wind up making caricatures of what they think was being portrayed. This problem is very much apparent in a lot of the recent Star Trek novels, where the ideas of peaceful discourse and negotiation have been replaced by characters regularly hurling insults and issuing ultimatums.
I'd disagree here, although I have of course no way of talking about or for "most Trek fans". In my subjective observation largely based on these forums and reddit which is my main exposure to other Star Trek fans other than the select people who are close to me personally I'd say "most Trek fans" are rather condescending about TNG and mostly are in favour of DS9's later seasons as the show became more action oriented and more streamlined OR they're mostly TOS influenced. A lot of people grew up on TNG though, that might be true simply due to the mean age distribution we have.
I don't like late DS9 because of the action, I like it because of the story, the action just helps sell it.
To me, a good way to show the highs and lows of Humans and humanity, is through war and other conflicts. That's why, to me again, DS9 is the most Human of the shows, because it shows 'us' reacting to the situations faced by Sisko and the crew of DS9.
The 'Humans' in early TNG were aliens with Human faces, I don't know what Gene was playing at with the 'we do not feel grief' bollocks, but it really turned me off TNG.
Later on, of course, the show did pick up, but again, I found the episodes dealing with the Cardassians or Romulans more interesting than the 'crew gets possessed by alien conscience no. 301', because the former is an exploration of all of us, the latter is an exploration of shome characters were only three are of interest to me.
That's why I like a lot of ENT and the AR films, because they're even more relevant to me than DS9 was (though not anywhere near as well crafted). Most likely because I mainly grew up in the 90's and 2000's (so during and post 9/11 and 7/7) so themes of secret wars, preemptive action, and the greater good are of more relevance to me than metaphors for apartheid or the Irish peace process.
Overall, there's no 'Trek' I dislike on the whole, even VOY (my least favourite) has episodes I really like (such as the contentious 'Scorpion') .
None of this is a dig at you @angrytarg merely pointing out that there are reasons for the action and that war stories can draw people in for reasons other than 'splosons.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
(...)
I would agree that, by and large, fans seem to gravitate towards DS9 as their "favo(u)rite" today, due to the action (but, also, the superior storytelling)... I would still argue, though, that TNG is still "the measuring stick" for the majority of the fan base. DS9 and VOY are continuations that rest on the universe-expanding done in TNG. It may not be everyone's favorite, but it is the foundation that "modern" Trek is built upon. From ship design, to uniforms, to species, TNG fuels at least one understanding of what makes Trek "Trek."
A pleasure having a thoughtful conservation like this, I have to say
It might surprise some people (maybe @artan42 at least ) but DS9 is probably also my favourite Trek incarnation because it is very well written and we get really strong character pieces which I like a lot. The action scenes I like as much as the next fan although they are full of holes especially in DS9 (shields anyone?) and a particular part of DS9's metaplot is extremely poorly thought out but by fair and large I like it a lot. However I don' think it's the writing alone that wins over so many people and DS9's following really only got big when the big 'splosions came. Visually a lot is based on TNG I agree, but spiritually things changed as @lordrezeon pointed out. I like DS9 for the strong writing but I actually prefer TNGs philosophy and message which is more in line with TOS (for the goods and the bads).
Of course, variation vs. continuation is what pushed Abrams to do what he did... he preferred the TOS series, but didn't what to disrupt that branch of canon. He thus moved the toys into another sandbox, for better or worse.
This is an interesting point, as Abrams himself is on record stating to never have even watched TOS when he got the project. In fact he wanted Star Wars but couldn't have it at that point and just went with the "next best thing". I appreciate at least going the AR route but I do not think there's too much thought put into it. It's a bit like STO, unforutnately full of wasted potential.
I'm curious, now... how would you feel about the new series jumping ahead in the Abrams universe? Would that give you enough differentiation, in terms of the "movie crew" and "show crew" idea?
I can't really answer that at his point. I'm as desperate for a new installment of Star Trek as probably most people on here. The AR however is very dissatisfactory to me in terms of visualization and underlying ethics. I would at least give it a shot as not following classic characters and storylines "reimagined" would be a huge bonus. The AR could prevent them from creating too many canon conflicts but on the other hoof if it turns out to be another show about defending the western way of life by "any means necessary" I'd probably turn it off sooner or later.
While I am theoretically in the same "range" as you are I do not consider TOS and TNGs utopian messages of cooperation and averting violence as outdated or any less relevant. Even though the factual motives might have changed, when I see the episodes I often have to think that sadly nothing has changed. It's like watching a Simpsons episode from the 90s (you know, back when it was legitimate satire) and you realize nothing has changed at all. Cooperation, rising above petty revenge and averting violence is more relevant today than ever, probably. Bulding a better future for all, not defending one against another.
I can find likeable things in ever installment of Trek, I think. I just have to look very closely in many of them. A while ago the realization struck that I would actually say I actively like actually the minority of Star Trek we got over the years, not by much of course but the things I would say are really "good" in all or most parts are less than the mediocre or in my opinion actual bad things
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
It might surprise some people (maybe @artan42 at least ) but DS9 is probably also my favourite Trek incarnation because it is very well written and we get really strong character pieces which I like a lot. The action scenes I like as much as the next fan although they are full of holes especially in DS9 (shields anyone?) and a particular part of DS9's metaplot is extremely poorly thought out but by fair and large I like it a lot. However I don' think it's the writing alone that wins over so many people and DS9's following really only got big when the big 'splosions came. Visually a lot is based on TNG I agree, but spiritually things changed as @lordrezeon pointed out. I like DS9 for the strong writing but I actually prefer TNGs philosophy and message which is more in line with TOS (for the goods and the bads).
I've seen your dislike for ENT and the AR, but I did know you liked DS9, I just guessed you were more of a TNG Targ.
While I am theoretically in the same "range" as you are
That's some odd wording there. My age is easy enough to work out from my comment, so unless you're unsure about your own, it's not exactly theoretical .
'Technically' or 'basically' would work better if it's the same range.
I do not consider TOS and TNGs utopian messages of cooperation and averting violence as outdated or any less relevant. Even though the factual motives might have changed, when I see the episodes I often have to think that sadly nothing has changed. It's like watching a Simpsons episode from the 90s (you know, back when it was legitimate satire) and you realize nothing has changed at all. Cooperation, rising above petty revenge and averting violence is more relevant today than ever, probably. Bulding a better future for all, not defending one against another.
I don't think the messages are irrelevant on the whole, just that the backstory behind them is less apt. 'It's easy to be a saint in paradise' sums it up. I prefer DS9 because, on the whole, the messages are the same as in TNG, but still hold true when humanity is on the brink as opposed to when humanity is just drifting around scanning stuff and waxing poetical.
There are certain points I know we'd disagree on (Section 31) or I don't know which way you'd go (Sisko vs. the Marquis or 'In the Pale Moonlight' and 'Inter Armistilldon'tknowthetitle') but the core principles of cooperation and exploration of self I still enjoy. I just think they are on better display in DS9 than in TNG.
Not exactly on this same topic but though people have disagreed with Sisko and Ross' actions in the aforementioned episodes, they were still undertake in the middle of a war. I have much greater disdain for Picard's actions in early TNG, such as his praise for Riker for letting people die needlessly.
I can find likeable things in ever installment of Trek, I think. I just have to look very closely in many of them. A while ago the realization struck that I would actually say I actively like actually the minority of Star Trek we got over the years, not by much of course but the things I would say are really "good" in all or most parts are less than the mediocre or in my opinion actual bad things
I was looking at the episode list for TOS yesterday (for AoT) and came to the same conclusion.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
DS9 benefitted from B5 imo... it started off very TNG but once ratings took a hit(anecdotal evidence) and B5's ratings soared, I noticed that DS9 started to show a much much tighter story with more continuity and character growth. These were things that made B5 amazing scifi, hell they were things that made me stop being a hardcoreTrekkie for several years. Once DS9 began to play a better game it's fanbase grew, and so did its ratings. Sadly any lessons learned there were forgotten for Voy and ENT
Said it before and will say it again: JJ Abrams HATES that space is big. He is literally incapable of writing for an environment where the characters can't lookup and see everything that's happening anywhere else in the entire cosmos. Not even on a monitor - they have to be able to see galactic events unfolding in real time with their own eyes peering skyward.
That was my biggest problem with the Force Awakens.
The Starkiller Base destroys a bunch of planets that is assumed to be within separate solar systems. All these explosions are visible from the Rebel base and happen in seconds after each other. The weapon would have to travel faster than light and might produce a tiny flash of light produced by tachyons, but it would not be visible from a planet lightyears away since the explosion would have to be about the size of a solar system or bigger to be noticeable. The other possibility is that all the planets are in the same solar system, but that is just as unlikely without massive planetary engineering that is beyond the capabilities of the current Star Wars galaxy.
As the page jonsills linked noted, this is not a new problem, and it's something Star Trek has had problems with, too. In TNG: "Redemption" we're expected to believe that 23 starships can provide sufficient coverage on the entirety of the minimum several-light-year-long Klingon-Romulan border to keep any Romulan ships from supporting Duras. And in Star Trek VI Sulu says they're heading home on impulse power from roughly 1,000 LY away. Impulse is the ship's sublight engine; do the math.
I assumed Sulu meant that they were using "Full Impulse Power" at that moment.
And that they were also doing WARP Jumps in between "Cataloging Gaseous Planetary Anomalies" along their route back home through the Beta Quadrant.
Also remember that in The Motion Picture, it was indicated that Half Impulse was about half the speed of light. (.5c)
So Full Impulse is probably pretty darn fast. (though not as fast as the actual Speed of Light)
So, they're headed home, some 1000 lightyears away, at full impulse, which is apparently a significant fraction of c. So they should be there in only, say, 1200 years. Of course, given Lorentz transformations, that might seem like only a few decades ship-time...
Silly Rabbit...
I guess you decided to completely ignore the point I made about the Excelsior probably also using WARP Drive at times, and that they were using Impulse AT THAT MOMENT, while doing the scientific research/cataloging AND heading back home.
After all, they used their WARP Drive to quickly get to Khitomer to help Kirk.
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
Said it before and will say it again: JJ Abrams HATES that space is big. He is literally incapable of writing for an environment where the characters can't lookup and see everything that's happening anywhere else in the entire cosmos. Not even on a monitor - they have to be able to see galactic events unfolding in real time with their own eyes peering skyward.
That was my biggest problem with the Force Awakens.
The Starkiller Base destroys a bunch of planets that is assumed to be within separate solar systems. All these explosions are visible from the Rebel base and happen in seconds after each other. The weapon would have to travel faster than light and might produce a tiny flash of light produced by tachyons, but it would not be visible from a planet lightyears away since the explosion would have to be about the size of a solar system or bigger to be noticeable. The other possibility is that all the planets are in the same solar system, but that is just as unlikely without massive planetary engineering that is beyond the capabilities of the current Star Wars galaxy.
As the page jonsills linked noted, this is not a new problem, and it's something Star Trek has had problems with, too. In TNG: "Redemption" we're expected to believe that 23 starships can provide sufficient coverage on the entirety of the minimum several-light-year-long Klingon-Romulan border to keep any Romulan ships from supporting Duras. And in Star Trek VI Sulu says they're heading home on impulse power from roughly 1,000 LY away. Impulse is the ship's sublight engine; do the math.
I assumed Sulu meant that they were using "Full Impulse Power" at that moment.
And that they were also doing WARP Jumps in between "Cataloging Gaseous Planetary Anomalies" along their route back home through the Beta Quadrant.
Also remember that in The Motion Picture, it was indicated that Half Impulse was about half the speed of light. (.5c)
So Full Impulse is probably pretty darn fast. (though not as fast as the actual Speed of Light)
So, they're headed home, some 1000 lightyears away, at full impulse, which is apparently a significant fraction of c. So they should be there in only, say, 1200 years. Of course, given Lorentz transformations, that might seem like only a few decades ship-time...
Silly Rabbit...
I guess you decided to completely ignore the point I made about the Excelsior probably also using WARP Drive at times, and that they were using Impulse AT THAT MOMENT, while doing the scientific research/cataloging AND heading back home.
After all, they used their WARP Drive to quickly get to Khitomer to help Kirk.
On the same level of criticism used for Abrams, all we have to go by is what the characters said. And Sulu said they were headed home, a 1000-ly journey, at "full impulse". Nobody said anything in there about "warp jumps", which would be silly anyway - why slow to sublight when you're not actively observing the phenomenon? The warp drive works on a continuous basis, you know, not like the Jump Drive in nBSG or the stutterwarp in Traveller.
Face it, the point is proved, Abrams isn't the only one who doesn't grasp how frigging huge space is. Absolutely mind-bogglingly big. I mean, you might think it's a long way down the road to the chemists', but that's just peanuts to space! Listen...
because it didn't have a transwarp drive anymore by that time
says who? :P aside from the hand waving it away, thats a lore gap thats always bugged the hell outta me
I've always just figured the prototype was a dud. I mean, I know we only saw it fail after Scotty sabotaged it, but that doesn't preclude it having also failed offscreen during a proper flight test.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
Comments
That was my biggest problem with the Force Awakens.
Nope, she is the one that brought Janeway back. I will say though that her take on the Voyager books was pretty good overall, and were much more interesting than anything that was going on in the TNG or DS9 books. The addition of the Full Circle Fleet was a good way the spice up the Voyager plot concept, as opposed to the endless evil-Federation conspiracies that have clogged up most of the other post-Nemesis books.
Although I don't think it is explicitly stated in the movie, the Star Wars official websites description of the First Order's base seems to imply the planets were all in the Hosnian system. Which actually makes the sense of scale even worse when Han and the others can look up at the sky in a system a quarter of the galaxy away and can make out the individual planets of another system.
My character Tsin'xing
Zahn would be a HUGE boon, as the Star Wars fans are wanting him in the new universe somehow...
No, he hasn't, but neither has Drake, although there's a surprisingly large number of stylistic similarities between Jim Kirk and Drake's character Daniel Leary.
I've read several of Zahn's non-franchise works, including Night Train to Rigel (space travel by interstellar railroad) and the Cobra novels ("What do you do with super soldiers after the war is over?"). They're all on a par with the Thrawn books for quality.
Eh, I like the Aaron Allston X-Wing novels better.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
It's not "It's new and different" that's the problem, this is only a line used to create a strawman. The problem is that Star Trek is big at this point with a lot of material that set "rules" for stuff to come. When this "new and different" addition simply ignores that and just does things because "others did it as well" it's neither "courageous" nor deserves "praise".
If they had introduced guns in Lord of the Rings or starships in Harry Potter or car races in Star War... uh, never mind the last. But if people did that you can't mock "purists" for having a problem with it.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
You're reinforcing my point here
Just because another franchise does something doesn't mean you have or should change ways that drastically in another one, no matter if similiar or not.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
But I think Zahn is not quite ideal for Star Trek for another reason - he writes a lot of military science fiction, he loves strategy and tactics. It might be too "martial" for Star Trek.
But if they want a war story, and show off Starfleet Officers as competent, well trained experts of their fields, you definitely can't go wrong with him.
Not that he's actually an option on the table.
As the page jonsills linked noted, this is not a new problem, and it's something Star Trek has had problems with, too. In TNG: "Redemption" we're expected to believe that 23 starships can provide sufficient coverage on the entirety of the minimum several-light-year-long Klingon-Romulan border to keep any Romulan ships from supporting Duras. And in Star Trek VI Sulu says they're heading home on impulse power from roughly 1,000 LY away. Impulse is the ship's sublight engine; do the math.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
I assumed Sulu meant that they were using "Full Impulse Power" at that moment.
And that they were also doing WARP Jumps in between "Cataloging Gaseous Planetary Anomalies" along their route back home through the Beta Quadrant.
Also remember that in The Motion Picture, it was indicated that Half Impulse was about half the speed of light. (.5c)
So Full Impulse is probably pretty darn fast. (though not as fast as the actual Speed of Light)
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Meh. It's all a matter of perspective.
Let's not make veiled arguments... most Trek fans today view the franchise through TNG-flavored lenses. This is not surprising, as most of the fan base today grew up on that era, if not that show in particular. That's not to say that ALL fans grew up, or prefer, that branch of the franchise... nor does that mean it negates what came before it (or after it). Still, that view dominates the franchise.
This is why the Abrams movies upset so many fans, by my observations.
They are not continuations of the same, they are variations on a theme. And, I'm not just talking plot points here... structurally, thematically, stylistically... the Abrams movies *are* a variation on The Original Series. It's the same riff, but in a minor key... or, a slightly altered riff in the same key... but, it's a variation, not a continuation. And, sure, that may not be everyone's cup of tea, but it doesn't make it "out of bounds."
And, no, motorcycles don't ruin Trek... which is what I assume you're trying to get at.
As basically everything is, I agree.
I'd disagree here, although I have of course no way of talking about or for "most Trek fans". In my subjective observation largely based on these forums and reddit which is my main exposure to other Star Trek fans other than the select people who are close to me personally I'd say "most Trek fans" are rather condescending about TNG and mostly are in favour of DS9's later seasons as the show became more action oriented and more streamlined OR they're mostly TOS influenced. A lot of people grew up on TNG though, that might be true simply due to the mean age distribution we have.
I can only speak for myself here without diving into too many speculations. But yes, to me it's being a variation is the biggest problem. Despite being so different it slashed the creativity of the people involved. Reimagining classic icons is never well received and the fact that the modern films even downright retold stories we already had didn't help either. If we had followed the Kelvin for example the movies could have been singificantly better in my personal opinion, putting aside my dislike of the aesthetic choices they made as well as the juvenile comic relief. But fear not, a continuation wouldn't have been the better choice - basically all the TNG movies that "continued" the show's characters were mediocre or downright terrible. Show to movie transitions don't work and the only way the TMP movies with the original crew worked were because they largely were a series of movies, trying to combine the best of both worlds. But we essentially need a show crew and a movie crew in my opinion.
But I'm at least not opposed to new and original ideas. My favourite parts of STO for example are the early story arcs that didn't rely on rehashing show plots and the Deferi being a completely original creation are more dear to me than any brief cameo we have in the entire game. In general, Trek games weaving their own consistent stories were always superior to those trying to rehash already known events.
No, I was referring to pod-racers in Star Wars. I even said "Star Wars"
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Fair enough, and my mistake about the motorcycles, LOL.
Your comments and observations are well-thought, so allow me to refine my own:
I would agree that, by and large, fans seem to gravitate towards DS9 as their "favo(u)rite" today, due to the action (but, also, the superior storytelling)... I would still argue, though, that TNG is still "the measuring stick" for the majority of the fan base. DS9 and VOY are continuations that rest on the universe-expanding done in TNG. It may not be everyone's favorite, but it is the foundation that "modern" Trek is built upon. From ship design, to uniforms, to species, TNG fuels at least one understanding of what makes Trek "Trek."
Of course, variation vs. continuation is what pushed Abrams to do what he did... he preferred the TOS series, but didn't what to disrupt that branch of canon. He thus moved the toys into another sandbox, for better or worse.
I'm curious, now... how would you feel about the new series jumping ahead in the Abrams universe? Would that give you enough differentiation, in terms of the "movie crew" and "show crew" idea?
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if CBS decided to do a reboot version of TNG. As you pointed out, TNG for better or worse is regarded as the benchmark for Star Trek's success on television. I could easily see CBS's executives deciding to try to copy that formula again in a modernized rebooted format.
Would it be as successful as the original TNG? Probably not. Rebooting something like that only works if you understand why audiences liked and disliked the various aspects of the show. I've seen nothing in recent years to indicate that CBS has any real understanding of why the franchise was successful, rather most of the time they seem almost embarrassed to be associated with it.
There is also the issue of societal timing. TOS and TNG were products of older generations. Societal standards and views on various issues were different back then. In todays age many of cultural norms have changed and that is part of why modern writers have such trouble retelling the older stories. Modern writers don't always understand the reasoning behind the older generations views, so they instead wind up making caricatures of what they think was being portrayed. This problem is very much apparent in a lot of the recent Star Trek novels, where the ideas of peaceful discourse and negotiation have been replaced by characters regularly hurling insults and issuing ultimatums.
I don't like late DS9 because of the action, I like it because of the story, the action just helps sell it.
To me, a good way to show the highs and lows of Humans and humanity, is through war and other conflicts. That's why, to me again, DS9 is the most Human of the shows, because it shows 'us' reacting to the situations faced by Sisko and the crew of DS9.
The 'Humans' in early TNG were aliens with Human faces, I don't know what Gene was playing at with the 'we do not feel grief' bollocks, but it really turned me off TNG.
Later on, of course, the show did pick up, but again, I found the episodes dealing with the Cardassians or Romulans more interesting than the 'crew gets possessed by alien conscience no. 301', because the former is an exploration of all of us, the latter is an exploration of shome characters were only three are of interest to me.
That's why I like a lot of ENT and the AR films, because they're even more relevant to me than DS9 was (though not anywhere near as well crafted). Most likely because I mainly grew up in the 90's and 2000's (so during and post 9/11 and 7/7) so themes of secret wars, preemptive action, and the greater good are of more relevance to me than metaphors for apartheid or the Irish peace process.
Overall, there's no 'Trek' I dislike on the whole, even VOY (my least favourite) has episodes I really like (such as the contentious 'Scorpion') .
None of this is a dig at you @angrytarg merely pointing out that there are reasons for the action and that war stories can draw people in for reasons other than 'splosons.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I got introduced to Stackpole via BattleTech, the man is a master of the meta-plot and Machiavellian level intrigue sub-plots
A pleasure having a thoughtful conservation like this, I have to say
It might surprise some people (maybe @artan42 at least
This is an interesting point, as Abrams himself is on record stating to never have even watched TOS when he got the project. In fact he wanted Star Wars but couldn't have it at that point and just went with the "next best thing". I appreciate at least going the AR route but I do not think there's too much thought put into it. It's a bit like STO, unforutnately full of wasted potential.
I can't really answer that at his point. I'm as desperate for a new installment of Star Trek as probably most people on here. The AR however is very dissatisfactory to me in terms of visualization and underlying ethics. I would at least give it a shot as not following classic characters and storylines "reimagined" would be a huge bonus. The AR could prevent them from creating too many canon conflicts but on the other hoof if it turns out to be another show about defending the western way of life by "any means necessary" I'd probably turn it off sooner or later.
@artan42
While I am theoretically in the same "range" as you are I do not consider TOS and TNGs utopian messages of cooperation and averting violence as outdated or any less relevant. Even though the factual motives might have changed, when I see the episodes I often have to think that sadly nothing has changed. It's like watching a Simpsons episode from the 90s (you know, back when it was legitimate satire) and you realize nothing has changed at all. Cooperation, rising above petty revenge and averting violence is more relevant today than ever, probably. Bulding a better future for all, not defending one against another.
I can find likeable things in ever installment of Trek, I think. I just have to look very closely in many of them. A while ago the realization struck that I would actually say I actively like actually the minority of Star Trek we got over the years, not by much of course but the things I would say are really "good" in all or most parts are less than the mediocre or in my opinion actual bad things
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I've seen your dislike for ENT and the AR, but I did know you liked DS9, I just guessed you were more of a TNG Targ.
That's some odd wording there. My age is easy enough to work out from my comment, so unless you're unsure about your own, it's not exactly theoretical
'Technically' or 'basically' would work better if it's the same range.
I don't think the messages are irrelevant on the whole, just that the backstory behind them is less apt. 'It's easy to be a saint in paradise' sums it up. I prefer DS9 because, on the whole, the messages are the same as in TNG, but still hold true when humanity is on the brink as opposed to when humanity is just drifting around scanning stuff and waxing poetical.
There are certain points I know we'd disagree on (Section 31) or I don't know which way you'd go (Sisko vs. the Marquis or 'In the Pale Moonlight' and 'Inter Armistilldon'tknowthetitle') but the core principles of cooperation and exploration of self I still enjoy. I just think they are on better display in DS9 than in TNG.
Not exactly on this same topic but though people have disagreed with Sisko and Ross' actions in the aforementioned episodes, they were still undertake in the middle of a war. I have much greater disdain for Picard's actions in early TNG, such as his praise for Riker for letting people die needlessly.
I was looking at the episode list for TOS yesterday (for AoT) and came to the same conclusion.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Silly Rabbit...
I guess you decided to completely ignore the point I made about the Excelsior probably also using WARP Drive at times, and that they were using Impulse AT THAT MOMENT, while doing the scientific research/cataloging AND heading back home.
After all, they used their WARP Drive to quickly get to Khitomer to help Kirk.
Have you been taking lessons from @Mirrorchaos??
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Face it, the point is proved, Abrams isn't the only one who doesn't grasp how frigging huge space is. Absolutely mind-bogglingly big. I mean, you might think it's a long way down the road to the chemists', but that's just peanuts to space! Listen...
says who? :P aside from the hand waving it away, thats a lore gap thats always bugged the hell outta me
I've always just figured the prototype was a dud. I mean, I know we only saw it fail after Scotty sabotaged it, but that doesn't preclude it having also failed offscreen during a proper flight test.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"